Phenom
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Leeds
Age: 71
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A friend's son has just graduated as Sgt Aircrew (aka WSOp) and has no idea where he is going next with regards to streaming. I hear on the grapevine that this may be related to a rumor that current WSOp training at Shawbury has been suspended TFN (anyone confirm or deny this?). It would seem that it is not just the Pilot pipeline that is suffering.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Axminster Devon
Age: 83
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unmanned Droid I recall the younger AEF pilots being a little less relaxed in the cockpit with cadets - even the week in and week out staff cadets like me. I guess the younger pilots feel the responsibility a little more keenly.
You will only get holding pilots flying on the AEFs if they have reached wings standard, as you need to be QSP to carry passengers (gliders aside); unless it's changed, there was a 400hr TT requirement as well. And given that most of them will only have managed 5-10 hours solo time, I'm not sure I would want my children flying with them!
Phenom as an initial ME trainer
If you’ll forgive a civvie butting in, I have just completed an Embraer 145 type rating. I have a question re the suitability of the Phenom as a ME trainer. I have quite a lot of hours in traditional multi-engine pistons and turbo-prop airliners. In comparison with, for example, an ATR, the ERJ seems to me, as a tail jet, a lot easier to keep control in EFATO senarios, (in one sim session my initial tbought was ‘It can’t be an engjne failure, it’s too easy’ until I looked at the engjne instruments) So, is a tail jet (and I assume the asymmetric effect is even less in a smaller aircraft like the Phenom?) actually demanding enough (purely in the asymmetric charactristics sense - I’m not thinking about putting a student into a fairly high performance aircraft, which I guess the military are wont to do) for an initial ME trainer?
EDIT: Yes, obviously I didn’t do my intial ME training on an ATR, but I would have thought the previously used Kingair a much better aircraft to teach the basic skills, while having the degree of relative complexity and performance a military training programe might need (I assume) as well as being a pretty tough aircraft.
EDIT: Yes, obviously I didn’t do my intial ME training on an ATR, but I would have thought the previously used Kingair a much better aircraft to teach the basic skills, while having the degree of relative complexity and performance a military training programe might need (I assume) as well as being a pretty tough aircraft.
Last edited by Jump Complete; 21st Sep 2018 at 22:06. Reason: Typo’s, clarification.
Or the DA42 that pretty much every ME training school is operating these days. Oddly enough this is what the RAF ME students will be learning on with the contract with L3 at Bournemouth.
A friend's son has just graduated as Sgt Aircrew (aka WSOp) and has no idea where he is going next with regards to streaming. I hear on the grapevine that this may be related to a rumor that current WSOp training at Shawbury has been suspended TFN (anyone confirm or deny this?). It would seem that it is not just the Pilot pipeline that is suffering.
Surely it is time for the NAO to come and have another look - I don’t see much more progress since their last report 3 years ago?
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/up...g-Training.pdf
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/up...g-Training.pdf
Pardon another civvie if you please....
I seem to recall that this whole business of using contractors to provide training was branded as cost saving/good economy ?
So, how does it tick when it takes 8 years, as stated in an earlier post, to get to a FJ squadron ? It seems to be agreed that potential aircrew are 'holding' for inordinately longer periods as a consequence of the inflexible training system. Surely the additional cost of 'holding' ought to be factored against any claimed MFTS savings.
This just seems to be another exercise for making money, like Airtanker.
I'm sure it would be a relatively simple accounting exercise to prove that this new training business does not give value for the taxpayer.
I seem to recall that this whole business of using contractors to provide training was branded as cost saving/good economy ?
So, how does it tick when it takes 8 years, as stated in an earlier post, to get to a FJ squadron ? It seems to be agreed that potential aircrew are 'holding' for inordinately longer periods as a consequence of the inflexible training system. Surely the additional cost of 'holding' ought to be factored against any claimed MFTS savings.
This just seems to be another exercise for making money, like Airtanker.
I'm sure it would be a relatively simple accounting exercise to prove that this new training business does not give value for the taxpayer.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,807
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
Non-aircrew, long retired, but agree entirely!
Fuzzy accounting with things stowed in different budgets? Whichever, it seems horrendously slow and inefficient.
Fuzzy accounting with things stowed in different budgets? Whichever, it seems horrendously slow and inefficient.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-abroad.html
Comment by LORD DANNATT, former Army head
Buying something you couldn’t really afford was taken to a new level in the 1990s under the Private Finance Initiative.
The government of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown seized on the concept to produce shiny new schools and hospitals across the country, especially in marginal constituencies.
But the Voyager PFI deal has to rank as the worst of the lot. Even at face value, £10.5 billion to lease 14 aircraft does not seem like value for money.
The project was led not by an RAF officer, but by an Army brigadier, so that there was no undue service bias.
But this brigadier was so alarmed at the way it was going that he came to me in 2008, while I was Chief of the General Staff, to ask if I could try to get this deal stopped.
I asked for a briefing, having been told there were much cheaper ways to meet the RAF’s air-to-air refuelling and strategic lift requirement.
At the briefing, all other options were dismissed for one spurious reason or another, leading to the curious conclusion that the £10.5 billion procurement of 14 A330 airliners, assembled at Airbus Industrie’s factory near Madrid, was the answer.
In the end, the politics of European industrial collaboration was the winner, the MoD was the loser, and now bucket-and-spade holiday-makers are travelling to sunny places overseas at British taxpayers’ expense. Is that value for money?
Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson’s Modernising Defence Programme must put a stop to scandals like this.
Buying something you couldn’t really afford was taken to a new level in the 1990s under the Private Finance Initiative.
The government of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown seized on the concept to produce shiny new schools and hospitals across the country, especially in marginal constituencies.
But the Voyager PFI deal has to rank as the worst of the lot. Even at face value, £10.5 billion to lease 14 aircraft does not seem like value for money.
The project was led not by an RAF officer, but by an Army brigadier, so that there was no undue service bias.
But this brigadier was so alarmed at the way it was going that he came to me in 2008, while I was Chief of the General Staff, to ask if I could try to get this deal stopped.
I asked for a briefing, having been told there were much cheaper ways to meet the RAF’s air-to-air refuelling and strategic lift requirement.
At the briefing, all other options were dismissed for one spurious reason or another, leading to the curious conclusion that the £10.5 billion procurement of 14 A330 airliners, assembled at Airbus Industrie’s factory near Madrid, was the answer.
In the end, the politics of European industrial collaboration was the winner, the MoD was the loser, and now bucket-and-spade holiday-makers are travelling to sunny places overseas at British taxpayers’ expense. Is that value for money?
Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson’s Modernising Defence Programme must put a stop to scandals like this.
Last edited by The B Word; 22nd Sep 2018 at 17:39.
Is it not also the case that we are restrained from using A400 as a refueller under the Airtanker contractual agreement? If so, who ever signed up to that certainly didn't look after the interests of the taxpayer.
It seems that military procurement is a process designed to serve the interests of industry first and foremost. If the folks at the sharp end get a decent bit of kit or service, that's a bonus.
Talked to a front line FJ pilot recently. Very nice chap indeed. 10/10 for being an excellent ambassador for the RAF. I must be getting old...cos he didn't look old enough!
On his first tour with a current FJ squadron. In his first year of his tour and he's been in the RAF for 9 years. Straight through the training system (Tutor/Tucano/Hawk/OCU) with no Instructional tour.
He was happy to talk about hours/month. Hugely enthusiastic about his role/mount. Discussed his future. Thoroughly nice young man.
On his first tour with a current FJ squadron. In his first year of his tour and he's been in the RAF for 9 years. Straight through the training system (Tutor/Tucano/Hawk/OCU) with no Instructional tour.
He was happy to talk about hours/month. Hugely enthusiastic about his role/mount. Discussed his future. Thoroughly nice young man.
Saw this on Ascents LinkedIn page
‘Congrats to all the Team at RAF Cranwell!
The first student pilots graduated from Elementary Flying
Training (EFT) on 23 Aug 18 marking another momentous achievement for No 3Flying Training School (3FTS) and the new Flying Training System under UKMFTS. This followed several other exciting firsts in recent months; the opening of new training facilities at Cranwell and Barkston Heath in January, in April the first student pilots took to the skies and the first student Prefect solo was flown in May
‘Congrats to all the Team at RAF Cranwell!
The first student pilots graduated from Elementary Flying
Training (EFT) on 23 Aug 18 marking another momentous achievement for No 3Flying Training School (3FTS) and the new Flying Training System under UKMFTS. This followed several other exciting firsts in recent months; the opening of new training facilities at Cranwell and Barkston Heath in January, in April the first student pilots took to the skies and the first student Prefect solo was flown in May
So, is there any truth to the rumour that the Phenom is a Cat 5?
Also, how many aviators in this forum would categorise 2 aircraft unintentionally touching each other in flight as 'Perceived severity - Medium' to flight safety?
Also, how many aviators in this forum would categorise 2 aircraft unintentionally touching each other in flight as 'Perceived severity - Medium' to flight safety?
Not me. Then again I was amazed there was not a more major investigation when the Typhoon and VC-10 traded paint (which I think was the most recent fixed-wing mid-air impact before this one).